Desplat13

(hoping this will not turn political) After about five generations of this, and five names tagged on, things will get, shall we say, complicated. Poor person...

Probably because his mother didn't want to give up her maiden name. It happens sometimes, and believe me, the trend will not lead anywhere good.

I'm there now....

I thought it was more brassy and less sax-y. Could be wrong, though. I haven't listened to it for a while.

Still listening to Somewhere in Time.

Gotta say I am with Joey on this one. Though Indy is still great.

Wrong! What they did was take that overused generic rhythm and turn it into something that almost came close to originality. Almost...

I keep going there, thinking that someone will be there, but no one is. For me, anytime after 9 eastern is good (well, until around 2 or so).

I thought it was a simply brilliant variation. Imagine, FOUR smilies!

Yes, my two favorite statements are the finale and also the "Jungle Chase". It really works great in an action setting.

OK, I said arguing music was pointless in my other post, but that might be a bit extreme. My main point was that movie music should be judged on the same criteria as any other form of music. I do, however, believe that it is possible, as Indy4 said, to 'see the light' and come to appreciate something that someone didn't like before, because of arguments. Probably not so much for a single score, but for a style. It is important to understand that there is a difference betweem 'hearing' something and 'listening' to something. 'Listening', to me, seems more like a verb, meaning the audience is taking more of an active role. I think this is why so much MV generic music is so popular: because people do not want to listen, they just want to hear it. They want to be able to bepop there head along with the beat the very first time, and in order to do this, all the beats must be the same. This is obviously not possible with most of Williams more complex action music. But convincing someone to really listen can often help them to appreciate a style more (by the way, I like some MV music. I also do not like a lot of MV music). Therefore, arguing about music is not really pointless, but arguing about movie music based on a musical knowledge is just as good an argument as any other.

That's interesting. I think Irina's is my favorite of the new themes.

I like how it sounds when Alan makes my arguments better than when I do...

What I meant was that arguing over music is really pointless, because so much is based on what style a person enjoys, and no amount of arguing will change that. We just do it around here because we like to. Therefore, using music theory in an argument is just as valid as saying 'I like how this melody sounds'.

This is somewhat in response to some posts and threads created by Quint in which he seems to imply that there is an inherent difference between music for itself and the 'magic' that is required in movie music. While I considered debating this in his thread, I decided to take a little more time and think it out more carefully, and found it to be an interesting topic. So hopefully this can generate some lively debate. OK, then, these are my thoughts and the logic behind them: I consider movie music to be nothing more than another form of music, just like ballet is a form and so is opera. In fact, I consider movie music to be somewhat of a combination of the two, with usually less emphasis on music than either. This is why I think it would be silly to judge movie music by a different criteria than any other music form, namely, how well does it do what it set out to do? Now often it seems that the reason for the need of this definition-elusive 'magic' in movie music is actually an attempt to discard musical arguments for or against music. So it is important to look at why we study any type of music (all types need magic, or inspiration, by the way), and whether movie music should be an exception. There seem (to me) to be two reasons for studying music. One, to learn how exactly the composer attained the effect that he did, and two, because it is fun. Both of these are obviously just as valid in movie music as in any other form. But, in the end, music is meant to be listened to above being studied, so trying to argue that this piece has great voicing and orchestration, while this is just boring same-old same-old will not convince anyone that the one is better, because they like the second better, and it is a matter of taste and style. This in no way means that the orchestration argument is not valid, but rather that it probably will not convince anyone (making it pretty much like any other music related argument). Therefore, it seems to me, that a musically studied and informed argument for or against movie music is just as valid as any other type of argument. Movie music is just another venue for music, and I don't see any reason to say that it cannot be judged on the same principles as any other form. So anyways, what are your thoughts, and where am I wrong?

I actually like the narration on WotW, though it is the only example I can think of that I have liked.

"Return of the Jedi", though I haven't heard the chamber one.

I'm in.

That'd be a dash, not a colin, were you Neil. Why am I being dragged into this?

B I enjoy it, but musically it gets a little boring, reminding me too much of the scales I should be working on...

Wait, your saying you actually watch these movies?

Is that the new Twilight? I was at Barnes and Nobles a little while back, and counted how many copies they had. I think it was like 20 copies, and I didn't see one Quantum of Solace. Weird.

The Slave Children theme, though.....now that would be tough.

The dc Talk version of "I Wish We'd All Been Ready" was better than Larry Norman's.